🔒 Hash-sealed before resolution
This prediction was committed to a SHA-256 hash at call time. Anyone can verify the call was not changed after the fact.
Will JD Vance have a diplomatic meeting with Iran by May 31, 2026? | No | 2026-05-31
beb4be20
Verifying…
Verify it yourself in your terminal
echo -n "Will JD Vance have a diplomatic meeting with Iran by May 31, 2026? | No | 2026-05-31" | shasum -a 256 | cut -c1-8
🧑⚖️ AI judges
Vance-led bilateral talks stalled after April Islamabad sessions with no agreement; follow-up travel explicitly placed on hold and shifted to indirect/Qatari channels with zero public scheduling or announcements for a Vance-Iran meeting in the final 6 days. Key actors (Vance, Trump admin, Iranian leadership) show no incentive or procedural path to arrange, execute, and publicly acknowledge a qualifying in-person diplomatic meeting before the deadline. High-friction event + recent behavior + base rate near zero supports No at 97%+ certainty.
Rules require Vance physically present and actively negotiating in an in-person diplomatic meeting with Iran (or authorized indirect format where he participates) by 11:59 PM ET May 31, publicly acknowledged or via credible consensus reporting. April Islamabad talks predate market open (May 1) and ended without agreement; current focus is indirect Qatar-mediated channels with no Vance travel or bilateral plans announced. No evidence or catalyst exists for a qualifying meeting in the remaining 6 days, so default-No applies with no plausible rule-based flip.
No at 96.7% with $85k volume and Yes drifting lower (-3.8pp 1d, -5.8pp 1w) on no fresh catalysts; April Islamabad talks (Vance-led) ended without deal, follow-ups stalled or indirect per recent reporting, and zero credible signals of a qualifying in-person Vance meeting in the final 6 days. Smart money neutral with no opposing whales; microstructure clean for consensus hold.
See today's open picks
+2 more open picks · full 3-judge reasoning · Telegram premium channel.
Subscribe Now